Justice and Fairness in the Healthcare System - Case Study Example

Health and Social Justice in the Public Healthcare System

Introduction

Health and social justice is the primary goal for any healthcare system, consequently, it has been classified as the core value of the field. There should be a fair distribution of the primary burdens and the common advantages of the justice stresses that are present in the healthcare system. Public health has been highlighted for its disregard on the implementation of policies that support fair distribution of health services among the parties involved. Justice and fairness in the healthcare system is observed in the treatment and decision-making that is observed in the healthcare system (Goldberg, 2012). There should be an improvement of healthcare service provision to all individuals, while focusing on the disadvantaged groups in the society. An important part of bringing about proper healthcare transformation is the task of acknowledging the patterns that are showed by the systematically disadvantaged individuals in the healthcare system. The public healthcare system should focus on the two primary angles of justice, which are the improvement of health among the population and consideration of the disadvantaged and the creation of a deeper understanding of public health.

WHO emphasizes that every individual is entitled to the provision of optimal healthcare services as a fundamental right in any setting. Access to healthcare should ensure timely, affordable, and acceptable healthcare services through the provision of optimal quality ("Health and human rights", 2016). The policies that are formulated should have the capacity to promote human rights through the inclusion of the right to health, particularly for vulnerable populations. Respect for human rights in the contemporary healthcare setting is a primary approach towards the attainment of suitable healthcare provision.

The primary insight of social justice observed that there are numerous channels that are utilized to demonstrate disadvantage. These incorporate substandard housing, poverty, pollution, poor education and social disintegration. These are among the numerous casual agents that are employed in the classification of disadvantaged individuals in the society, including the different levels of economic, social and political life (Fraser, Gatherer, & Moller, 2009). It is important to note that inequalities result into other inequalities that sustain and reproduce numerous deprivations.

Social justice should adopt an interventionist approach in contrast to a market-driven and passive approach while aggressively examining the different mechanisms that can be employed to determine the health levels throughout the lifespan. The approach acknowledges that there are numerous causes of good and ill health, including the practices and policies that influence healthcare and affect different dimensions of life (Mackie, 2010). Therefore, the empirical inquiries are critical in healthcare. The collection of field data can assist in the identification of individuals that are subjected to the greatest risk to facilitate the implementation of suitable policies in the public healthcare system.

Literature Review

The public healthcare field is subjected to great criticism from the public resulting in a decline in the level of public confidence. The American culture is observed to openly accommodate the enjoyment and expression of privilege and wealth, subsequently, healthcare is classified as a matter that demands personal responsibility. Therefore, the public has become skeptical on the ability of the government to consider the harshest results of socioeconomic disparities. It is important to reconsider the consideration of the values of socioeconomic fairness in the public healthcare system through the redevelopment of policies that consider the values of socioeconomic fairness (Mackie, 2010).

The principal goal of a human rights-based solution would be the presentation of health programs and policies that are aimed at enhancing the enjoyment of all individuals through ensuring access to health. The interventions to attain this goal should adhere to strict guidelines and standards such as nondiscrimination, accessibility, availability, quality and accountability. The guideline based on nondiscrimination emphasizes that individuals in the healthcare sector should provide healthcare services while disregarding the color, race, language, religion, gender, political standing, social and national origin, birth, property and other status such as age, disability, family status and sexual orientation ("Health and human rights", 2016). Public healthcare facilities should also provide a substantial and sufficient supply of healthcare facilities and public health such as services, goods and programs. Moreover, the services and products offered in the healthcare facilities must have proper respect for the cultural and ethical guidelines in the healthcare sector, including a proper demonstration of sensitivity to life-cycle and gender demands. There should be continuous demonstration of accountability to ensure that health professionals are answerable for their actions ("Health and human rights", 2016).

The demonstration of the state’s coercive power has been conflicting over the course of the United States history. After public health officials act, the individuals face conflicts between the economic and personal interests and the benefit of the implemented policies on the population. It is evident that the public health powers surround the fundamental civil liberties, including bodily integrity and the freedom of association and movement (Mackie, 2010). Moreover, the sanitary regulations encroach the freedom of contract, the use of personal property and the pursuit of professional status. Social justice requires that the government take action to protect the health of the public, while respecting individuals and demonstrating sensitivity to the needs of the underprivileged individuals in the society.

Both civil liberties and public health are observed to both claim the mantle of the regulation of justice in the public healthcare system. Demonstrating a suitable balance is difficult and is encompassed with controversy. The crucial aspect of justice is abiding by the rule of law that demands modern public health statuses, which delegate evident authority to provide fair processes and actions in the healthcare system. Hence, policymakers should modernized the current public health laws to offer sufficient powers to minimize the primary risks that the populations face and ensure that the government’s power is demonstrated to the population fairly and proportionately (Goldberg, 2012). Fairness demands the proper distribution of benefits and burdens to all individuals in the nation, including proper procedural due process for the individuals that are subjected to mandatory interventions.

The justice perspective cannot respond to the numerous conflicting problems that demonstrate an intersection of civil liberties and public health, including the realistic interventions and the exercise of powers during emergencies. The current public policy fails to consider the demands of social justice that are disregarded in the formulation of such policies.

National, State and Local Public Health Functions

The arguments that support and dismiss the need for the centralization of political power are dominant in the course of the United States history, in addition, they form part of the political ideologies. There lacks a simple resolution, thus, the justice perspective is required to shed light in this area. The consideration of social justice disregard the need for state and federal action. Social justice fails to demand the government action regarding the primary causes of ill health, particularly concerning the disadvantaged.

The justice perspective on the interactive and multi-cultural determinants of health demands the development of strategic opportunities for the amelioration and prevention of ill health at different levels of government interaction. The problem that is associated with combating the threat of systemic disadvantage can only be addressed with a proper systematic reaction among different levels of government. The level of government that can be considered best suited to deal with the public health threads is dependent on the evidence that is present in the identification of the origin and nature of the particular threat, including the resources that can be invested in solving primary public healthcare system problems (Wilson, 2009).

The national government is tasked with the creation of the capacity of the public health care system to accommodate the essential healthcare services. The presence of a national commitment to capacity building is imperative since public needs for well-being and health are universal and compelling. The creation of a strong public healthcare system demands that the federal government recognize these needs. A health threat such as the spread of a disease and environmental pollution is observed to span numerous regions, states and the entire nation. Therefore, the jurisdiction for such issues should be countered at the national level since it encompasses numerous states (Goldberg, 2012). Moreover, states do not have sufficient expertise and resources to launch an effective response in the public healthcare emergency sector.

States and localities should be equipped with the appropriate tools and resources to fulfil the primary healthcare functions, including offering education to the public, enforcing the state healthcare laws and mobilizing community partnerships. The localities and states are observed to have a closer association with the people, including the problems that cause ill health. The delivery of public health services demands political accountability and local knowledge. Localities and states are often observed to be the preferable unit of government when evaluating the complex and insufficiently understood issues (Goldberg, 2012). Thus, localities can seek innovative solutions to problems facing the public healthcare system.

It is evident that the system demonstrates an evident interaction between the state, local and national healthcare system duties. Thus, the government has various responsibilities at all levels of government. There should be harmonized response systems implemented in the public healthcare system at the local, state and national healthcare levels. The various levels of government should play a unique role in the coordination of public health activities and response systems, particularly to emergencies.

Public Policy Imperatives in Public Health

The public health community in the United States has not succeeded in gaining the required attention and resources that are demanded to attain the core mission and provide the essential services to the citizens. While disregarding the health emergencies, it is evident that the public does not demonstrate a particular interest in public health as a priority, which shows clear underfunding. Considering the fiscal perspective, there is only a minimal fraction of funds that are invested in immediate response approaches to perceived and actual threats in the healthcare system. This results in a stable and core funding and attention mentality. It is evident that this type of response leads to the creation of disproportionate allocation of funds, creation of silos and the presence of a no-win situation for the different public health agencies that must react to the fashion trends, while garnering political attention and the necessary economic resources they demand to optimize the public healthcare system (Wilson, 2009). The social justice perspective presents an opportunity to alter this dynamic through the creation of concrete proposals that are based on the proper distribution of benefits and improvement of the health population.

Implications for Transcultural Nursing and Transformational Leadership

The public healthcare system should demonstrate a primary concern for human well-being with a clear commitment to public health. Thus, social justice demands long-term, and tangible pledges to the advancement of the public health and needs. The commitment that should be demonstrated at the national, state and local levels is lacking. The prevention and population-based services in the public health care system are underfunded. In addition, the funding for special programs such as emergency response approaches is limited by the inexistent policies and funding (Wilson, 2009).

There should be substantial actions to ensure the promotion, prevention and provision of healthcare to the public, including proper and stable commitment to at the local, state and federal levels. Considering the importance and gravity of the situation, Congress and the executive branch should formulate a Trust Fund to fund public health to ensure stable flow of resources to create the declining healthcare infrastructure and ensure the proper flow of the public health functions (Fraser, Gatherer, & Moller, 2009). In order to ensure proper provision of public health, the Trust for America’s Health demands sustained spending amounting to $1.5-$2 to optimize the public health infrastructure.

Consideration of Health Determinants

If social justice is to be considered, public health must consider the underlying causes of good and poor health. The primary health determinants incorporate the built environment, the informational environment, the natural environment, the economic environment and the social environment. The built-in environment demands the constant provision of the transportation and building infrastructure that is demanded in the healthcare system. The natural environment demands the constant monitoring and presentation of natural resources such as water and clean air. The social environment requires the constant provision of proper social services such as social support and social networks. On the other hand, the economic environment demands the constant monitoring of the socioeconomic status of the population. Finally, the informational environment demands the constant provision of health information through social networking and advertising (Gatherer, Fraser, Hayton, & Moller, 2010). These present public healthcare issues that are not solved solely by public healthcare agencies.

Addressing the Treatment of the Disadvantaged

It is important to note that around 100 million individuals are below the poverty line, consequently, marginalized and vulnerable populations in the society have the tendency to be burdened with a significant proportion of health problems ("Health and human rights", 2016). Attaining the optimal healthcare standards is closely associated with the provisioning of housing, food, non-discrimination in the healthcare setting, education, work, participation and increased access to information for individuals in the contemporary setting ("Health and human rights", 2016). Vulnerable populations and marginalized populations in the contemporary society have limited access to proper healthcare services. For instance, three of the world’s communicable diseases, including HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis are observed to unequally affect poor populations, resulting in a notable economic burden ("Health and human rights", 2016).

People that utilize drugs, particularly injectable drugs and men that have sex with men are often subjected to discrimination thus facing both economic and social disadvantages ("Health and human rights", 2016). The present laws and policies should focus on the reduction of marginalization of these groups to enhance the increased access of the populations to healthcare services.

One of the founding aspects of justice is the provision of a fair distribution of benefits and burdens in the population. The assignment is based on political and market influence, particularly the political influence of the various stakeholders in the public healthcare system. The individuals that have the greatest needs in the society should be considered first in the allocation of resources. Social justice demands that the public health system device programs and plans that have a particular focus on the disadvantaged, which are particularly important when planning for health emergencies and in the presence of extreme scarcity (Fraser, Gatherer, & Moller, 2009).

Health emergencies are noted to threaten the entire community, however, the disabled and the poor are more vulnerable to the risk. Social justice requires that there is proper distribution of resources, particularly in extreme health emergencies. There is an erosion of public trust and decline in social cohesion in nations that disregard the need to act expeditiously with a considerable concern for all citizens. It is important that the various administrative structures acknowledge that the basic human needs are similar to all the members of the society. Social justice, therefore, encompasses a core commitment to the fair and considerable distribution of resources and the development of policies of action, which are parallel to the preservation of human dignity and the acknowledgment of the need for equal respect to the interests of all the members of the society (Mackie, 2010).

The poor are unable to access healthcare due to financial limitations that limit their ability to seek proper healthcare and access certain services in healthcare centers. Thus, the poor lack the ability to access certain healthcare services and seek the services of healthcare personnel in the contemporary world. It is important to ensure that health is affordable to every individual in the contemporary world through provision of sufficient insurance services.

The homeless individuals in the society suffer from the lack of sufficient healthcare services in the contemporary world. Homeless individuals are marginalized leading to their exclusion in the consideration of public policy in the contemporary healthcare world. Hence, it is important to ensure the introduction of health services and initiatives that specifically target the homeless individuals through informing them of various approaches to accessing healthcare.

People with chemical dependence demonstrate an increased disregard for healthcare, including the different intervention programs to minimize their chemical dependence. This leads to secondary problems for individuals with chemical dependence such as a decline in their breathing system. Consequently, there should be interventions to reduce chemical dependence among individuals thorough appropriate policies.

Planning for Emergencies

Health emergencies present a potential for mass death and illnesses, usually resulting in minimal countermeasures to facilitate emergency response. The public healthcare system does not provide sufficient stockpiles to cater for the surge in medical demands during emergencies, including hospital beds, medical personnel and medical supplies. Healthcare planning is evidence of the consideration of the different individuals at varying socioeconomic status, subsequently, social justice demands the presence of proper countermeasures to cater for the devalued and displaced members of the society in emergency situations (Gatherer, Fraser, Hayton, & Moller, 2010).

Conclusion

Social justice in the public healthcare system is bound to result from the different policy shifts. Political leaders should create a proper and fair allocation of funds to ensure that the disadvantaged members of the society are provided with proper medical care, including the poor and disabled in the society. The discussion notes the importance of constant cooperation and coordination between the local, state and federal government initiatives and policy formulations. The primary claim presented in this paper is the need for demonstration of commitment to the social justice system. The commitment is bound to ensure the advancement of the human well-being in the society and further promote common good through showing proper and equal respect for all individuals that make up different groups in the society.